Reconstructing the shattered visage of Queen Hatshepsut

The reassessment of damaged statues representing the famous female Pharaoh Hathepsut questions the dominant opinion that they were destroyed as an act of defilement, indicating that Hathepsut was treated in a similar way to the previous pharaohs in death.

The former Egyptian sovereign Hatshepsut acquired an emblematic status in modern times for his role of more of the greatest leaders of Egypt and one of her rare female pharaohs, but she also incurred political persecution after her death.

During the 1920s, excavations on the Deir El-Bahri site (Luxor, Egypt) found many fragmented statues of Hatshepsut. These damage has traditionally been considered as a violent act of remuneration caused by its nephew and successor, Thutmose III.

However, many statues have survived relatively good condition, questioning the idea that destruction was motivated by the animosity of Thutmose III to Hathepsut.

“While Hatshepsut’s” broken face “has dominated popular perception, such an image does not reflect the processing of its statuary to its best,” said research author, Jun Yi Wong of the University of Toronto. “Many of its statues survive relatively good condition, with their practically intact faces.”

To determine the real motivation behind this destruction, Wong examined field notes, drawings, photographs and unpublished correspondence from excavations of 1922-2010, re-evaluating archaeological evidence on the basis of this data. Its results are published in the journal Antiquity.

The archive material indicates numerous statues suffered by damage that has not been caused by Thutmose III. Many of them have been reused in subsequent periods as building materials and tools, which added to their damage.

In addition, the statues that were damaged during the reign of Thutmose did so specificly: by breaking them through their weak points (neck, size and knees).

This phenomenon is known in Egyptology and often called “deactivation” of the statues. The practice aims to neutralize the inherent power of images and has been granted to the statuary of various kings throughout Pharaonic history.

“In other words, this treatment does not necessarily designate hostility towards the individual represented,” explains Wong.

Consequently, damage to these statues probably took place following the ritual deactivation of statues and subsequent pragmatic reuse rather than malicious iconoclastic destruction.

This indicates that Hatshepsut was treated in the same way in death to his predecessors.

“For a long time, it has been assumed that Hathepsut’s statuary has undergone a vindictive attack by Thutmose III,” said Wong. “However, a careful” re -examination “of the archives indicates that this is not the case, and various other agents contributed to the destruction of these objects.”

However, this does not reduce the possibility that at least part of this destruction was intended to damage the legacy of Hathepsut.

“Unlike other leaders, Hatshepsut has undergone a program of persecution, and its wider political implications cannot be overestimated,” concludes Wong. “However, there is room for a more nuanced understanding of the actions of Thutmose III, which were perhaps motivated by ritual necessity rather than by pure and simple antipathy.”